Volume 1 — REMINISCENCES OF SIXTY YEARS IN PUBLIC AFFAIRS VOLUME I (continued 6)

In my five years of service I made more than three hundred addresses upon educational topics. In that service I visited most of the cities and towns, met the citizens individually and in masses, visited the factories and shops, and thus I became well acquainted with the habits of the people, their industries and modes of life. In each year I held twelve teachers' institutes and each institute continued five days in session. A portion of each day was given to criticisms, during which time the teachers of the institute and the lecturers were freely criticised by cards sent to the chair without the names of the critics. Hence there was the greatest freedom, and no one on the platform was allowed to escape. It is an unusual thing to find a speaker, even of the highest culture, who can speak an hour without violating the rules of pronunciation, or showing himself negligent in some important particular. The teachers of the teachers gained daily by these critical exercises.

Among the lecturers and teachers were some men of admitted eminence. Agassiz was with me about two years as lecturer in Natural History. His skill in drawing upon the blackboard while he went on with his oral explanation was a constant marvel. He was not a miser in matter of knowledge more than in money. Of his vast stores of knowledge he gave freely to all. Any member of a class could get from him all that he knew upon any topic in his department. When he was ignorant he never hesitated to say: "I don't know." He was very chary of conjectures in science. Indeed, I cannot recall an instance of that sort. He chose to investigate and to wait. In all his ways he was artless. He was a well built man with a massive head and an intelligent face. His presence inspired confidence.

Associated with him by nativity and ties of friendship, was Professor Guyot. Professor Guyot taught physical geography, and previous to 1855 he had wrought a change in public opinion in regard to the method of introducing the science to children. All the then recent text-books omitted physical geography, or reserved it for a brief chapter at the close of the work. Guyot changed the course of study. His motto was this: "We must first consider this earth as one grand individual." On this foundation he built his system. Morse, the father of the inventor of the system of telegraphic communication, was the author of a geography published in the eighteenth century, and he commenced with physical geography. His successors, Cummings, Worcester, and others abandoned that scientific arrangement and introduced the learners to political and descriptive geography. Moreover, their teaching of physical geography was devoted to definitions to be learned by rote. Many of the text-books in use in the schools were framed upon similar erroneous ideas. The first sentence in Murray's Grammar was a definition of the science, and was in fact, the conclusion deduced from a full knowledge of the subject.

George B. Emerson, who was one of our teachers, gave a great impetus to the art of teaching grammar. He discarded books, and beginning with an object, as a bell or an orange, he would give a child at the age of twelve years a very good knowledge of the science in six lessons of an hour each. Dr. Lowell Mason was a teacher in the institutes during my entire period of service, although he offered to retire on account of age. He was an excellent teacher, and in the art practically, perhaps, the best of all. Professor William Russell was the teacher of elocution. His recitations were good, as were his criticisms on language, but as a teacher, he had not a high rank. After the retirement of Professor Agassiz, I employed Sanborn Tenney, a young man of great industry and enthusiasm. He had in him the promise of a great career in natural science, but he died prematurely in the State of Michigan while upon a lecturing tour. From first to last I had the benefit of a good corps of teachers with a single exception. In drawing I inherited from Dr. Sears a young man of English parentage. His statements were so extraordinary often, that I lost confidence in him. One day he wandered from his subject and indulged himself in denunciations of the English aristocracy. He closed with this remark: "Although I belong to the haristocracy, I 'ate 'em!" At the end of the autumn term, I dismissed him.

During my service as Secretary, I made the acquaintance of several persons whom I should not otherwise have known. Among them were President Hopkins of Williams College, President Hitchcock of Amherst College, and President Felton of Harvard College. Hopkins might properly be termed a wise man. He resembled President Walker who for several years presided over Harvard. Felton was a genial man, of sufficient learning for his office, and exceedingly popular with the students and with the public. It was during his administration that I was elected to membership in the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, through his influence, and the influence of the professors at the College.

I resigned the office of Secretary, January 1, 1861, with the purpose of resuming the practice of law. During my term of office, I prepared five annual reports, the last of which, the twenty-fourth in the Series, was devoted to an analysis of the school laws with a history of the educational and reformatory institutions of the State. I also published a volume of educational papers, which had a considerable sale, especially in the State of Ohio, where a copy was ordered for each school library.

XXIII PHI BETA KAPPA ADDRESS AT CAMBRIDGE

About ten days before the 18th of June, 1861, Judge Hoar called at my office and invited me to deliver the Phi Beta Kappa oration at Cambridge on the 18th of the month. Although I had but little time for preparation, I accepted the invitation upon the understanding, or rather upon his request, that I was to deal with the questions then agitating the country. Among my hearers was the venerable Josiah Quincy, formerly President of the College. My address was so radical that the timid condemned it, and even Republican papers deprecated the violence of my language—they then living in the delusion that concessions, mild words and attitudes of humility could save the Union. Mr. Quincy was not of those. He gave to my address unqualified support, and I had no doubt that the majority of my audience sympathized with my views. There were, however, copperheads, and peace-men at any price, and gradually there appeared a more troublesome class of men who professed to be for the prosecution of the war, but criticized and condemned all the means employed. They were the hypocrites in politics—a class of men who affect virtue, and who tolerate and protect vice in government.

My address was called "The Conspiracy—Its Purpose and Power," and as far as I know, it was the first time that emancipation was demanded publicly, as a means of ending the war and saving the nation. The demand was made in a qualified form, but I renewed it in the December following in an address that I delivered before the Emancipation League. This address gave rise to similar or even to severer criticisms from the same classes. They were never a majority in Massachusetts, but they had sufficient power to impair the strength of the state, and in 1862 under the style of the People's Party, they endangered the election of Governor Andrew.

These criticisms made no impression upon me, for my confidence was unbounded that emancipation was inevitable and I was willing to wait for an improved public opinion.

I quote a portion of my remarks at Cambridge, which gave rise to criticism in some quarters, and provoked hostility among those whose sympathies were with the South:

"The settlers at Jamestown and Plymouth did not merely found towns or counties or colonies, or States even; they also founded a great nation, and upon the idea of its unity.

"Their colonial charters extended from sea to sea. Their origin, their language, their laws, their civilization, their ideas, and now their history, constitute us one nation. In the geological structure of this continent, Nature seems to have prepared it for the occupation of a single people. I cannot doubt, then, that continental unity is the great, the supreme law of our public life.

"A division such as is sought and demanded by those who carry on this war would do violence to our traditions, to our history, to those ideas that our people South and North have entertained for more than two centuries, and to the laws of Nature herself. An agreement such as is desired by the discontented would only intensify our alienations, embitter the strife, and protract the war upon subordinate and insignificant issues. Separation does not settle one difficulty at present existing in the country; while it furnishes occasion, and necessity even, for other controversies and wars, as long as the line of division remains.

"Nor can we doubt, that when, by division, you abandon the Union, acknowledge the Constitution to be a failure, the contest would be carried on regardless of State sovereignty, and finally end in the subjugation of all to one idea, and one system in government. Whatever may stand or fall, whatever may survive or perish, the region between the Atlantic and the Rocky Mountains, between the great lakes and the Gulf of Mexico, is destined to be and to continue under one form of government. . . ."

I advanced a step further in December, as will be seen from the extracts from my speech on Emancipation:

"I say, then, it is a necessity that this war be closed speedily. By blockade it cannot be; by battle it may be; but we risk the result upon the uncertainty whether the great general of this continent is with them or with us. I come, then, to emancipation. Not first,—although I shall not hesitate to say, before I close, that as a matter of justice to the slave, there should be emancipation,—but not first do I ask my countrymen to proclaim emancipation to the slaves in justice to them, but as a matter of necessity to ourselves; for, unless it be by accident, we are not to come out of this contest as one nation, except by emancipation. And first, emancipation in South Carolina. Not confiscation of the property of rebels; that is inadequate longer to meet the emergency. It might have done in March or April or May, or possibly in July; but, in December, or January of the coming year, confiscation of the property of the rebels is inadequate to meet the exigency in which the country is placed. You must, if you do anything, proclaim at the head of the armies of the republic, on the soil of South Carolina, FREEDOM,—and then enforce the proclamation as far and fast as you have an opportunity; and you will have opportunity more speedily then than you will if you attempt to invade South Carolina without emancipating her slaves. Unsettle the foundations of society in South Carolina; do you hear the rumbling? Not we, not we, are responsible for what happens in South Carolina between the slaves and their masters. Our business is to save the Union; to re-establish the authority of the Union over the rebels in South Carolina; and, if between the masters and their slaves collisions arise, the responsibility is upon those masters who, forgetting their allegiance to the Government, lent themselves to this foul conspiracy, and thus have been involved in ruin. As a warning, let South Carolina be the first of the States of the Republic in which emancipation to the enslaved is proclaimed."

I left home for Washington on the Monday following the Sunday when the first battle of Bull Run was fought. When near New Haven, the conductor brought me a copy of a press despatch which gave an account of the engagement and indicated or stated that the rebels had been successful. On the seat behind me were two men who expressed their gratification to each other, when they read the despatch over my shoulder. When I had a fair view of them, I formed the opinion that they were Southern men returning South to take part in the conflict. It is difficult to comprehend the control which the States' Rights doctrine had over the Southern mind. In my conversations with General Scott the influence which the course pursued by Virginia exercised over him was apparent. Those conversations left upon me the impression that he had debated with himself as to the course he ought to pursue. Attachment to Virginia was the sole excuse which Lee offered in his letter to his sister which contained a declaration that there was no just cause for secession.

In July, 1861, Washington was comparatively defenceless. Mr. Lincoln was calm, but I met others who were quite hopeless of the result.

My speech upon Emancipation in December, 1861, led to a request from the publishers of the Continental Magazine for an article upon the subject. It appeared in February, 1862, and in that article I set forth the necessity of immediate emancipation as a war measure, and by virtue of the war power, under the title, "Our Danger, and Its Cause." Rapid changes were then taking place in public opinion, and in Massachusetts the tide was strong in favor of vigorous action. It was arrested temporarily in the summer of 1862, by the untoward events of the war, and the "People's Party" became formidable for a brief season.

One of the peculiar circumstance of the contest was the acceptance by General Devens of the post of candidate for Governor by the People's Party. General Devens was then in the army, and with considerable experience he had shown the qualities of a good soldier. But he was not a Republican. In other days he had been a Webster Whig, and as marshal of the district of Massachusetts he had charge officially of the return of the negro Sims to slavery.

This act had brought down upon him criticisms, quite like maledictions, from the Anti-Slavery Party. By these criticisms he had been embittered, and although he was hearty in support of the war, he had not then reached a point in his experience when he could realize that the only efficient way of supporting the war was to support the Republican Party.

At a later period he identified himself with the Republican Party, and as a Republican he filled with honor a place upon the bench of the Supreme Court of Massachusetts, and upon the election of President Hayes, he was made Attorney-General of the United States. That office he filled with tact, urbanity, and reasonable ability. He belonged to a class of orators of which Massachusetts has furnished a considerable number—Mr. Everett was the chief. His disciples or followers included Hillard, Burlingame, Bullock, Devens, Long, and some others of lesser note. The style of these men was attractive, sometimes ornate, but lacking in the force which leaves an indelible impression upon the hearer.

XXIV THE PEACE CONVENTION OF 1861

In the month of January, 1861, the State of Virginia invited the States to send delegates to a congress or convention to be held in the city of Washington. The call implied that the Union was a confederation of States as distinguished from an independent and supreme and sovereign government, set up and maintained by the people of the whole country, except as the States were made the servants of the nation for certain specified purposes. There was hesitation on the part of Massachusetts, and some of the States of the North declined to respond to the call. After delay, Governor Andrew appointed John Z. Goodrich, Charles Allen, George S. Boutwell, T. P. Chandler, F. B. Crowninshield, J. M. Forbes, and Richard P. Waters as commissioners to the convention.

The meeting was held on the 6th of February in Willard's Hall, in the city of Washington. The door upon the street was closed, and the delegates were admitted from Willard's Hotel through a side door, cut for the purpose. The entrance was guarded by a messenger, and only members were admitted. There were no reporters, but Mr. Chittenden, of Vermont, made notes from which he prepared a volume that was published, but not until several years after the congress had ceased to exist. A few of the members furnished him with reports of their speeches, but not always in the language used at the time of delivery. My memory of what was said by Mr. Chase and Mr. Frelinghuysen did not correspond with the Chittenden Report. As the Convention had been in session several days when the Massachusetts delegation appeared, we were assigned to seats that were remote from the chair.

The convention was composed of three classes of men. Secessionists, led by John Tyler, the president of the convention, Seddon of Virginia, and Davis and Ruffin of North Carolina; border State men from Virginia, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Kentucky, who had faith in differing degrees that the Union might be saved, and war averted; and radical men who had no faith that anything could be done by which the Union could be saved, except through war. Soon after my arrival in Washington, I called on a Sunday upon Mr. Seddon. We had a free conversation. He said:

"It is of no use for us to attempt to deceive each other. You have one form of civilization, and we have another. You think yours is the best for you, and we think that ours is the best for us. But our culture is exhausting, and we must have new lands. One part of your people say that Congress shall exclude slavery from the territories, and another set of men say that it will be excluded by natural laws. Under either theory, somebody must go, and if we can't go with our slaves, we must go without them and our country will be given up to the negroes."

With the system of slavery, and in the absence of knowledge of the value of manufactured fertilizers, this was not an unreasonable view. Looking forward a hundred years and assuming the continued existence of slavery, there was no conclusive solution of the problem presented by Mr. Seddon. But he did not seem to consider that he was warring against nature as well as against the Union in his attempt to extend the area of slavery. His efforts, had they been successful, could only have postponed the crisis for a period not definite, but surely not of long duration. When the Confederacy was formed, Mr. Seddon became Secretary of War, and when the war was over, I recognized his friendship by securing the removal of his disabilities under the Fourteenth Amendment. Of the Secessionists, Mr. Seddon was the leading man upon the floor of the convention. It was manifest that he did not wish to secure the return of the seceded States. On one point he was anxious, and he did not attempt to disguise his purpose. He sought to secure from the convention, or if not from the convention, from the delegates from the Republican States, an assurance that in no event should there be war. One of the errors, indeed, the greatest error, was the failure of the Northern delegates to assert that in no event should the Union be dissolved except through the success of the South in arms. As far as I remember, this was not asserted by any one except myself.

Many expressed their fear of war and urged the convention to agree to some plan of settlement as the only means of averting war. Mr. Stockton, of New Jersey, went so far as to assert that in case of war the North would raise a regiment to aid the South as often as one was raised to assail it. Mr. Chase's remarks on the floor of the convention indicated a disposition to allow the South to go without resistance on our part, and in a conversation that I had with him as we walked one evening on Pennsylvania Avenue, toward Georgetown, he said:

"The thing to be done is to let the South go."

The interest of the convention centred upon the Committee of Thirteen, of which Mr. Guthrie was chairman. While the Committee of Thirteen was considering what should be done, Mr. John Z. Goodrich said that he had called upon Mr. Seward, and that Mr. Seward expressed a wish to see me. I had not the personal acquaintance of Mr. Seward, and Mr. Goodrich offered to take me to Mr. Seward's house. We called in the evening. His conversation and bearing were different from the conversation and bearing of most of the public men of the time. He spoke as though the subject of conversation was the chance of a client and the means of bringing him safely out of his perils. He spoke of the speech he had made in the Senate and said:

"My speech occupies the mind of the South for the present: then the proceedings of the Peace Congress will attract attention, and by and by we shall have the President's inaugural which will probably have a good influence."

He did not assume the probability of war. Before we left he asked me whether I had seen a certain number of the Richmond Enquirer. I said that I had not. He sent for it, and gave it to me with the request that I should return it after reading the leading editorial. The editorial was upon Mr. Seward, and it was written upon the theory that he was engaged in a scheme for delaying definite action in Virginia and the other States of the South, until the inauguration of Mr. Lincoln, when he would use both whip and spur. From the conversation and the editorial I inferred that he intended to have me understand that such was his purpose. It is possible he may have thought that war could be averted by dilatory proceedings.

When the report of the Committee of Thirteen was made, the border State men had high hopes that the country, both North and South, would accept its recommendations. In truth, there was no ground for believing that the Secessionists or the anti-slavery Republicans, would accept the propositions. The recommendations were more offensive to the North than the original constitution, with all the compromise legislation, considered together.

I think that there were five speeches made in support of the resolutions before a speech was made in opposition, and it fell to me to make that speech. One morning there was a conference between the Massachusetts delegation, which was composed of radical men only, and the radical members of the New York delegation, at which it was agreed that a speech should be made in opposition, and that Massachusetts should lead. The duty was put upon me, accompanied with the suggestion that I should speak that day. I had not made any preparation, but during the time that I had occupied a seat in the convention, my conviction had been strengthened that it was impossible to adopt a plan that would be acceptable to the contending parties, and consequently that any scheme of compromise that could be framed would result in a renewal of the controversy, under circumstances less favorable to the North. At that moment the government was in the hands of men who were incapable of decisive action. While we could not count upon active measures against secession on the part of Mr. Buchanan, on the other hand, the country had ample assurance that he would do nothing in aid of the unlawful proceeding. That he had declared in his message of December, 1860. Beyond that, we had a right to assume that Mr. Lincoln would maintain the Union by force. Hence, I resolved to say that no scheme would be accepted by us which did not contain an abandonment of the doctrine of secession, an acknowledgment of the legality of Mr. Lincoln's election, and a declaration that it was the duty of the whole body of citizens to render obedience to the Government. I very well knew that these terms would be rejected with scorn, as I well knew that any other terms would be rejected. Conspirators are never disposed to make terms with the party or person against whom their conspiracy is aimed, until the conspiracy has failed. Hence it was that those who humbled themselves in the dust were treated with contumely, even more offensive than the invectives which the conspirators showered upon the heads of those who neither proffered nor accepted terms of compromise.

Mr. Chittenden's report is accurate in respect to the views that I presented, but it is incomplete, as I spoke about an hour. When I began to speak, I advanced slowly up the aisle until I could look into the faces of the Virginia delegation, who occupied the settee next to the president's desk. Mr. William C. Rives was one of the Virginia delegation, a Union man, who sympathized with the border State men, and hoped by some concession to avert war. When I said that if the South persisted in secession, "the South would march its armies to the Great Lakes, or we should march ours to the Gulf of Mexico," the tears came into his eyes. My remark that the North abhorred the institution of slavery, wounded the Southern men sorely. They were not indignant, but grieved rather. At any rate, such was their aspect, and for many days the remark was repeated or referred to with the hope, apparently, of inducing me to retract or qualify it. I allowed it to stand as a truth which they might well accept.

When the day came for the final vote upon the first resolution relating to slavery as reported by the Committee of Thirteen, a meeting of the New York delegation was called in consequence of the engagement of David Dudley Field to argue a case in the Supreme Court. Mr. Field was one of the six Republican members, and associated with them were five Democrats and Conservatives.

As each State had one vote, his absence would set New York out of the contest unless the Democrats would agree that Mr. Field's vote should be counted in his absence. This proposition the Democrats refused to accept, and they gave notice that the vote of New York would be lost unless Mr. Field remained and voted. Mr. Field left, and the vote of the State was lost. There were twenty-one States represented, including Kansas, which was in a territorial condition when the convention assembled, and the Territorial Governor had sent a Conservative, Mr. Thomas Ewing, Jr. His father was a member from Ohio. When the State government of Kansas was organized, the Governor delegated a Republican. Both were allowed seats, although manifestly, Mr. Ewing should have retired.

When the vote was declared, it appeared that eight States had voted in the affirmative, and eleven States in the negative. The border State men were sorely disappointed, and some of them wept like children. The result they must have anticipated, but they had been wrought to a high condition of nervous excitement, due in part to the circumstance that they were unable to discuss the business of the convention in public. The disagreeable silence which followed the announcement of the vote, was broken by Mr. Francis Granger, who counseled calmness and deliberation, and finally, he appealed to the States of the majority to move a reconsideration. This was done by the State of Illinois, through Mr. Turner, who made the motion. The next day the resolution was adopted by a vote of nine to eight. Upon this question the Missouri delegation refused to vote, under the lead, it was said, of General Doniphan, who denounced the resolutions as not satisfactory to either side. Doniphan was a large, muscular man, who acquired some fame in the Mexican war as the leader of a cavalry expedition to California, of which nothing was heard for about six months.

The reconsideration was attributed to the interference of Mr. Lincoln or of his recognized friends.

When the convention was about to adjourn, President Tyler made a speech in which he thrice invoked the blessing of Heaven upon the doings of the convention, and from that act he went to Richmond, and in less than three days he was an avowed and recognized leader in secession. Indeed, it was understood in the convention that Mr. Seddon was his representative on the floor. The doings of the Congress were endorsed by Maryland, but in the National Congress, and in the States North and South they were neglected utterly. The result which Mr. Seward anticipated was not realized by the country.

After the arrival of Mr. Lincoln the Massachusetts delegation called upon him to recommend the selection of Mr. Chase for the Treasury Department in preference to General Cameron, and to say that the capitalists of the East would have more confidence in the former than in the latter. Mr. Lincoln did not say what his purposes were, but he made this remark:

"From what I hear, I think Mr. Chase is about one hundred and fifty to any other man's hundred."

On the Saturday next but one, preceding the 4th of March, we called upon Mr. Buchanan at about eleven o'clock in the morning. He said that he should prefer to see us in the evening. In the evening we found him alone. He at once commenced conversation, which he continued with but slight interruptions on our part. His chief thought seemed to be to avert bloodshed during his administration. Next, he thought he had been wronged by both sections. Said he:

"When I rebuked the North for their personal-liberty bills, the South applauded; but when I condemned the secession movement, then they turned against me."

He referred to the Charleston Mercury as having been very unjust, and then putting his feet together, and with his head on one shoulder, he said:

"I am like a man on a narrow isthmus, without a friend on either side."

Within a few days of this interview, we called upon General Cass, who was then living in a house that is now annexed to the Arlington Hotel. He had retired from the Cabinet of Mr. Buchanan, and he had regained something of his standing in the North, but he had been so long the advocate of compromises and the servant of the slave power, that he was unable to place himself in line with the movement that was destined to destroy slavery. The slave power had more vitality than slavery itself; and after a third of a century its poison still disturbs the politics of the country. The call was made in the forenoon. General Cass sat at a small, plain table, engaged in writing. He was in a large room, from which the furniture, including the carpets, had been removed. He said that he had been kept in Washington by the illness of his daughter, and that upon her improvement he should leave for Michigan. He was dressed in a much worn suit of black—his shirt had seen more than one day's service—he had not been shaved recently, and his russet-colored wig was on awry. The room had an aspect of desolation, and General Cass appeared like a man to whom life had nothing of interest. As soon as the ceremony of introduction was over, he commenced walking and talking, while the tears ran down his wan and worn cheeks. He gave us an account of his early life, of his residence in Virginia, and then he said:

"I crossed the Ohio with only a dollar in my pocket. I went to Michigan. I was four times Governor of the Territory, and on more than one occasion I was confirmed by the Senate without a single dissenting vote. I have been a Senator, and Minister to France; and I am going home to Michigan to die. If I wanted the office of constable, there isn't a town in the State that would elect me."

He reminded me of Cardinal Wolsey, rather than of the Senator, Minister to France, and Secretary of the Department of State that he had been. He spoke of his course in politics, the substance of which was that he had always opposed secession and nullification, although he had maintained the right of the States to hold slaves if they chose to tolerate the institution.

General Cass was the last of the statesmen of the middle period of our history whom it was my fortune to meet. As a whole, and as individuals their fortunes were unenviable. They struggled against the order of things. They accomplished nothing, unless it may be said of them, that they kept the ship afloat. Their memories deserve commiseration, possibly gratitude. No effort of theirs could have secured the abolition of slavery. Any vigorous movement in that direction would have ended in the destruction of the government. From John Adams to Lincoln, only three important measures remain: The acquisition of Louisiana, the acquisition of California, and the Independent Treasury Bill. The war of 1812 was unwise, and in conduct it was weak. The policy of that middle period in regard to paper money, to internal improvements, in regard to the protection of domestic industry, and in regard to slavery has been set aside or overthrown by the better judgment of recent years. Yet so much are statesmen and parties the servants or victims of events, that our opinions should be tolerant of the men who kept the system in motion. Slavery was an inheritance, and time was required for its destruction.

I returned to Massachusetts without waiting for the inauguration.

As I spoke in the convention upon the request of the Republican members of the New York delegation, and as the Representative of the Massachusetts delegation; and as my remarks were not criticized adversely by either party, I reproduce the speech as it was reported by Mr. Chittenden:

SPEECH IN PEACE CONVENTION

I have not been at all clear in my own mind as to when, and to what extent, Massachusetts should raise her voice in this convention. She has heard the voice of Virginia, expressed through her resolutions, in this crisis of our country's history. Massachusetts hesitated, not because she was unwilling to respond to the call of Virginia, but because she thought her honor touched by the manner of that call and the circumstances attending it. She had taken part in the election of the 6th of November. She knew the result. It accorded well with her wishes. She knew that the government whose political head for the next four years was then chosen was based upon a Constitution which she supposed still had an existence. She saw that State after State had left that government,—seceded is the word used,—had gone out from this great confederacy, and that they were defying the Constitution and the Union.

Charge after charge has been vaguely made against the North. It is attempted here to put the North on trial. I have listened with grave attention to the gentleman from Virginia to-day; but I have heard no specification of these charges. Massachusetts hesitated, I say: she has her own opinion of the Government and the Union. I know Massachusetts; I have been into every one of her more than three hundred towns; I have seen and conversed with her men and her women; and I know there is not a man within her borders who would not to-day gladly lay down his life for the preservation of the Union.

Massachusetts has made war upon slavery wherever she had the right to do it; but, much as she abhors the institution, she would sacrifice everything rather than assail it where she has not the right to assail it.

Can it be denied, gentlemen, that we have elected a President in a legal and constitutional way? It cannot be denied; and yet you tell us, in tones that cannot be misunderstood, that, as a precedent condition of his inauguration, we must give you these guarantees.

Massachusetts hesitated, not because her blood was not stirred, but because she insisted that the government and the inauguration should go in the manner that would have been observed had Mr. Lincoln been defeated. She felt that she was touched in a tender point when invited here under such circumstances.

It is true, and I confess it frankly, that there are a few men at the North who have not yielded that support to the grand idea upon which this confederated Union stands that they should have yielded; who have been disposed to infringe upon, to attack certain rights which the entire North, with these exceptions, accords to you. But are you of the South free from the like imputations? The John Brown invasion was never justified at the North. If, in the excitement of the time, there were those to be found who did not denounce it as gentlemen think they should, it was because they knew it was a matter wholly outside the Constitution,—that it was a crime to which Virginia would give adequate punishment.

Gentlemen, I believe—yes, I know—that the people of the North are as true to the government and the Union of the States now as our fathers were when they stood shoulder to shoulder upon the field, fighting for the principles upon which that Union rests. If I thought the time had come when it would be fit or proper to consider amendments to the Constitution at all, I believe that we should have no trouble with you, except upon this question of slavery in the Territories. You cannot demand of us at the North anything that we will not grant, unless it involves a sacrifice of our principles. These we shall not sacrifice; these you must not ask us to abandon. I believe, further,—and I speak in all frankness, for I wish to delude no one,—if the Constitution and the Union cannot be preserved and effectually maintained without these new guarantees for slavery, then the Union is not worth preserving.

The people of the North have always submitted to the decisions of the properly constituted powers. This obedience has been unpleasant enough when they thought those powers were exercised for sectional purposes; but it has always been implicitly yielded. I am ready, even now, to go home and say that, by the decision of the Supreme Court, slavery exists in all the Territories of the United States. We submit to the decision, and accept its consequences. But, in view of all the circumstances attending that decision, was it quite fair, was it quite generous, for the gentleman from Maryland to say that under it, by the adoption of these propositions, the South was giving up everything, the North giving up nothing? Does he suppose the South is yielding the point in relation to any territory which, by any probability, would become slave territory? Something more than the decision of the Supreme Court is necessary to establish slavery anywhere. The decision may give the right to establish it: other influences must control the question of its actual establishment.

I am opposed, further, to any restrictions on the acquisition of territory. They are unnecessary. The time may come when they would be troublesome. We may want the Canadas. The time may come when the Canadas may wish to unite with us. Shall we tie up our hands so that we cannot receive them, or make it forever your interest to oppose their annexation? Such a restriction would be, by the common consent of the people, disregarded.

There are seven States out of the Union already. They have organized what they claim is an independent government. They are not to be coerced back, you say. Are the prospects very favorable that they will return of their own accord? But they will annex territory. They are already looking to Mexico. If left to themselves, they would annex her and all her neighbors, and we should lose our highway to the Pacific coast. They would acquire it, and to us it would be lost forever.

The North will consider well before she consents to this, before she even permits it. Ever since 1820, we have pursued, in this respect, a uniform policy. The North will hesitate long, before, by accepting the condition you propose, she deprives the nation of the valuable privilege, the unquestionable right, of acquiring new territory in an honorable way.

I have tried to look upon these propositions of the majority of the committee as true measures of pacification. I have listened patiently to all that has been said in their favor. But I am still unconvinced, or, rather, I am convinced that they will do nothing for the Union. They will prove totally inadequate; may perhaps be positively mischievous. The North, the free States, will not adopt them,—will not consent to these new endorsements of an institution which they do not like, which the believe to the injurious to the interests of the republic; and if they did adopt them, as they could only do by a sacrifice of principles which you should not expect, the South would not be satisfied: the slave States would not fail to find pretexts for a course of action upon which I think they have already determined. I see in these propositions anything but true measures of pacification.

But the North will never consent to the separation of the States. If the South persist in the course on which she has entered, we shall march our armies to the Gulf of Mexico, or you will march yours to the Great Lakes. There can be no peaceful separation. There is one way by which war may be avoided, and the Union preserved. It is a plain and a constitutional way. If the slave States will abandon the design which we must infer from the remarks of the gentleman from Virginia they have already formed, will faithfully abide by their constitutional obligations, and remain in the union until their rights are in fact invaded, all will be well. But, if they take the responsibility of involving the country in a civil war, of breaking up the government which our fathers founded and our people love, but one course remains to those who are true to that government. They must and will defend it at every sacrifice—if necessary, to the sacrifice of their lives.

At the close of the session, and upon the request of my associates upon the commission, I wrote a report to Governor Andrew, which was signed by all the members of the delegation. Governor Andrew submitted the report, with his approval, to the Legislature the 25th day of March.

The character of the convention, and something of the condition of the country may be gathered from the following extracts from the report:

"The resolutions of the State of Virginia were passed on the 19th of January; and it was expected that within sixteen days thereafter the representatives of this vast country would assemble for the purpose of devising, maturing, and recommending alterations in the Constitution of the Republic. As a necessary consequence, the people were not consulted in any of the States. In several, the commissioners were appointed by the executive of each without even an opportunity to confer with the Legislature; in others, the consent of the representative body was secured, but in no instance were the people themselves consulted. The measures proposed were comparatively new; the important ones were innovations upon the established principles of the Government, and none of them had ever been submitted to public scrutiny. They related to the institution of slavery; and the experience of the country justifies the assertion that any proposition for additional securities to slavery under the flag of the nation, must be fully discussed and well understood before its adoption, or it will yield a fearful harvest of woe in dissentions and controversies among the people. Nor could the undersigned have justified the act to themselves, if they had concurred in asking Congress to propose amendments to the Constitution unless they were prepared also to advocate the adoption of the amendments by the people.

"It is due to truth to say that the Convention did not possess all the desirable characteristics of a deliberative assembly. It was in some degree disqualified for the performance of the important task assigned to it, by the circumstances of its constitution, to which reference has been already made. Moreover, there were members who claimed that certain concessions must be granted that the progress of the secession movement might be arrested; and on the other hand there were men who either doubted or denied the wisdom of such concessions.

"The circumstances were extraordinary. Within the preceding ninety days the integrity of the Union had been assailed by the attempt of six States to overthrow its authority; seven other States were disaffected, and some of them had assumed a menacing and even hostile attitude. The political disturbances had been associated with or followed by financial distress.

"The Convention was then a body of men without a recognized and ascertained constituency, called together in an exigency and without preparation, and invited to initiate measures for the amendment of the Constitution in most important particulars, and all at a moment when the public mind was swayed by fears and alarms such as have never before been experienced by the American people.

"In these circumstances the undersigned thought it inexpedient to propose amendments to the Constitution, believing that so important an act should not be initiated and accomplished without the greatest deliberation and care. Nor could the undersigned satisfy themselves that any or all of the proposed amendments would even tend, in any considerable degree, to the preservation of the Union. Although inquiries were repeatedly made, no assurance was given that any proposition of amendment would secure the return of the seceded States; and it was admitted that several of the border States would ultimately unite with the Gulf States, either within or without the limits of the Union, as might be dictated by events yet in the future. Indeed, no proposition was in any degree acceptable to the majority of delegates from the border slave States that did not provide for the extension of slavery to the Territories, and its protection and security therein."

XXV THE OPENING OF THE WAR

When the call was made for seventy-five thousand men, the Sixth Regiment of Massachusetts was one of the first to respond. On the night of the 16th of April some, if not all, of the regiment, were quartered in Boston. I called upon Company B, of Groton, then in the hall over the Williams Market. I found that they understood that the movement meant war and duty. One of the men said to me:

"Some of us will never see Massachusetts again."

After the affair in Baltimore on the 19th of April, Governor Andrew asked me to go to Washington with despatches for Mr. Lincoln and General Scott. The message was communicated to me through Mr. John M. Forbes. In his letter of request and appointment Governor Andrew said:

"We need your information, influence and acquaintance with the Cabinet, and knowledge of Eastern public sentiment, to leave immediately for Washington. Hope you will proceed at once and open and preserve communication between you and myself." This letter was dated April 22. Under the same date the Governor wrote to President Lincoln:

"Ex-Governor Boutwell has been appointed Agent of the commonwealth to proceed to Washington to confer with you in regard to the forts in Massachusetts and the militia." I was instructed also to see General Wool in New York. I received a package of letters, the contents of which were disclosed to me, one hundred dollars in gold, and a small revolver loaded.* I took with me a young man named Augustus Bixby, who then lived in Groton, but who had seen something of the world, and was not daunted by the uncertainties of life. He was afterwards a cavalry officer. During the war I one day read in the papers that Bixby had been promoted for gallantry in an affair in the Shenandoah Valley. Within a few days after I met him in Washington on a crutch, or walking with the help of a cane. He had been wounded in the contest. I said:

"Bixby, what did you do?" He replied:

"I don't know, except I sailed in."

At New York I telegraphed Vice-President Hamlin, then in Maine, that he should come as far South as New York, that he might be in a situation to act in case of the death or capture of Mr. Lincoln, of whom we then knew nothing. At New York, April 24, I telegraphed Governor Andrew:

"General Wool and Vice-President Hamlin are in favor of your taking the responsibility of sending two regiments to take charge of the forts, and to furnish and arm three vessels for the protection of the coast. You can exercise the power, under the circumstance, better than anybody else." The same day I sent this dispatch: "Send without delay a steamer with provisions for General Butler's command at Annapolis."

At Perryville, at the mouth of the Susquehanna, I sent Bixby with the despatches by the first boat to Annapolis, with instructions to make his way to Washington at the earliest moment. I followed in the next boat. Upon my arrival at General Butler's headquarters, I learned that Bixby had left on foot. As the troops were at work in re-laying the track, there was no danger. Indeed, the small squads of men who had burned bridges and torn up tracks disappeared with the arrival of troops. At nine o'clock in the evening, a train, the first train, carrying the New York Sixty-ninth Regiment, left for Annapolis Junction, at which place we arrived at one o'clock in the morning. The only light upon the train was the headlight, and we moved only the length of the train at each inspection of the road. I made a pillow of my small valise, and a bed of my blanket, and camped on the floor of one of the small houses at Annapolis Junction. In the morning I found Colonel Butterfield of the New York Twelfth and Colonel Scott, a nephew of General Scott, who assumed the direction of affairs. He afterwards joined the rebels. I observed also that our encampment was commanded by hills on the north and east, and Colonel Butterfield informed me that the picket line was a long way inside the base of the hills. At about six o'clock in the evening, a train with troops and three civilians was made ready for Washington. The American flag was displayed at many of the houses on the line of the road.

I arrived in Washington the 27th day of April. I annex a copy of a letter that I wrote to Governor Andrew the day following:

WASHINGTON, April 28, 1861. To His Excellency Governor Andrew.

Sir:—I arrived in Washington to-day, after a journey of forty-eight hours from Philadelphia by Annapolis. There have been no mails from the North for a week; and you may easily understand that the mighty public sentiment of the Free States is not yet fully appreciated here.

The President and Cabinet are gaining confidence; and the measures of the Administration will no longer be limited to the defence of the capital. Secretary Welles has already sent orders to Captain Hudson to purchase six steamers, with instructions to consult you in regard to the matter. I regret that the Secretary was not ready to put the matter into the hands of commissioners, who would have acted efficiently and promptly.

Mr. Welles will accept, as a part of the quota, such vessels as may have been purchased by Mr. Forbes.

Senator Grimes of Iowa will probably give Mr. Crowninshield an order for arms. The United States Government may do the same; but no definite action has yet been taken.

Martial law will be proclaimed here to-morrow. Colonel Mansfield will be appointed general, and assigned to this district. He is one of the most efficient officers in the country.

Baltimore is to be closed in from Havre-de-Grace, from the Relay House, from the Carlisle line, and by an efficient naval force. She will be reduced to unconditional submission. The passage of the troops through Maryland has had a great moral effect. The people are changing rapidly in the country places. Many instances of a popular revolution, in towns through which troops have passed or been stationed, have come to my knowledge. I came to Washington with the Twelfth New York Regiment; and from Annapolis Junction there were cheers from three fourths of the houses by the wayside.

Everything appears well at Annapolis, where General Butler commands in person. There is a large body of troops, the people are gradually gaining confidence in the army and the Government, and the regulations seem to be effective. General Butler is popular with the officers whom I met. He has taken command of the highlands that command the town and the encampment. All sorts of rumors are spread among the troops concerning an attack upon the Annapolis Station; but the place can be defended under any conceivable circumstances. I am sorry to say, that everything is in confusion at Annapolis Junction, and a moderate force might, in a single night, break off the connection of this city with the North. Each colonel, as he moves towards Washington, commands for twelve or twenty-four hours. My own belief, however, is, that Maryland will never see two thousand men together as a military organization in opposition to the Government.

I presume that your Excellency has means of obtaining information concerning the condition of Massachusetts men, morally and physically; but, as I am here, I shall try to obtain and transmit any information that seems important. I may say now, that the Eighth Regiment is quartered in the rotunda of the Capitol; and a military man, not of Massachusetts, says, that they are already suffering from the cold and dampness of the place. He advises tents and out-door encampment.

I repeat what is every hour and in my hearing, that Massachusetts has taken her place at the head of the column in support of the Government; and our regiments are everywhere esteemed as noble examples of citizen soldiers. I, for one, feel anxious that everything that is proper should be done.

I have written this communication in great haste; and I have only time to subscribe myself your Excellency's obedient servant.

GEORGE S. BOUTWELL.

The next day I called upon General Scott. It was apparent that he was in no condition to organize or lead armies. He was lying upon a lounge, and when he arose he walked with his hand upon his hip and gave an account of his wound at the battle of Lundy's Lane. He was national in his views of duty, and he spoke with earnestness in reprobation of the conduct of Virginia. He spoke also of the efforts that had been made to induce him to go with his State. He seemed like a man without hope, but there were no indications of a lack of fidelity to the country. Aside from the circumstance that he was a native of Virginia and that Virginia was engaged in the Rebellion, it was too much to expect that at his age he could cope with so formidable a movement as the rebellion of eleven States. While I was in Washington I presented to General Scott a young man, Henry S. Briggs, a son of ex-Governor Briggs, whom General Scott had known when Governor Briggs was in Congress. Young Briggs was a lieutenant in the Berkshire regiment, then on duty in Washington. He wished for a corresponding appointment in the regular army. This appointment General Scott secured for him. Afterwards he became colonel of a Massachusetts regiment of volunteers and at the end of the war he was a brigadier- general of volunteers.

I left Washington for Massachusetts May 1. I was delayed a night and until four o'clock the day following at Annapolis, where General Butler was in command. I had my quarters with him, and during the night the long roll was beaten. The troops came out, and I waited for the result, which was the discovery that the call was due to a misunderstanding of the signal rockets. I left Annapolis in a small steam tug that came out of the Raritan Canal. We were buffeted about in the bay by a heavy wind, the captain lost his reckoning, anchored, and the next morning we found ourselves uncomfortably near to the Maryland shore.

The next day, May 2, I reached New York and from there I sent the following letter to Governor Andrew:

NEW YORK, May 2, 1861.

Sir:—I arrived here this afternoon, and I hope to report to you in person Saturday. I had free conversation with the President, General Scott, Mr. Seward, Mr. Chase, General Cameron, and Mr. Blair, upon public affairs. The impression I received from all, except perhaps Mr. Seward, was favorable to a vigorous prosecution of the war. Mr. Seward repeated his words of December and February. "The crisis is over." It is, however, understood at Washington that Mr. Seward favors vigorous measures. Mr. Chase says that the policy of the Administration is vigorous and comprehensive, as sure to succeed in controlling the Rebellion, and preserving the whole territory of the Union. I will only say now, that I left Washington with a more favorable impression of the policy of the Government than I entertained when I left Boston.

General Cameron agreed to authorize Massachusetts to raise two regiments in addition to that of Dwight. The papers were all made, and only a Cabinet meeting prevented their completion on Tuesday. I did not wish to remain another day, and I left the papers with the chief clerk; and I also received the assurance of Colonel Ripley, that he would give personal and prompt attention to transmitting them to Boston. I shall expect them on Sunday.

Colonel Ripley issued an order on Tuesday for rifling cannon. Mr. Forbes' letter aided very much.

I am truly your most obedient servant, GEORGE S. BOUTWELL.

I was in Washington again in the month of May, and I made a third visit the second day after the first battle of Bull Run. At one of these visits I met General Hooker, at Mr. Sumner's quarters on F. Street. He had then recently arrived from California and his appearance indicated poverty. His dress was worn, and his apparel was that of a decayed man of the world. He had called upon Senator Sumner to secure his aid in obtaining the command of a Massachusetts regiment, he being a Massachusetts man by birth. In the course of the conversation Hooker said that if he could obtain a regiment, he would come to the command of the army, and take Richmond. When he came to the command of the army it seemed possible that his vain boast might be fulfilled in both particulars. The cause of his failure may be the subject of debate, but, at Chancellorsville, his orders were not obeyed. It is probable, however, that Hooker lacked the qualities of a great commander. He inspired his soldiers with enthusiasm, he was brave, and his heart was in the cause. With many faults, he was one of the great soldiers of the war, and with less sensitiveness of spirit he might have been one of its renowned chieftains.

I have obtained from the War Department copies of two letters that I wrote to Gen. Cameron, Secretary of War, dated at Havre de Grace, April 26, 1861. They throw some light on the war movements at that time.

HAVRE DE GRACE, April 26, 1861. HON. SIMON CAMERON:

Sir: I have written upon the letter of Governor Andrew which Mr. Bixby will hand to you.

I cannot too strongly impress upon the Government the importance of authorizing Governor Andrew to procure three steamers for the protection of the coast and to aid in a blockade of the southern ports. The New York merchants are anxious to do the same. I hope you will grant the order. Governor Andrew will put the work of preparation into the hands of our best merchants, who will charge no commissions whatever.

The whole North is wild and determined in its enthusiasm. Should not the Government make another requisition? They will be needed, I fear, and a short and vigorous campaign round Washington will be advantageous in the highest degree.

I am, very truly, your obedient servant, GEORGE S. BOUTWELL.

HAVRE DE GRACE, April 26, 1861. HON. SIMON CAMERON:

Sir: I have obtained an order from General Wool to garrison the forts and arsenals, but it is of the utmost importance to obtain authority to purchase at least three steamers and equip them for coast defense. This can be done at a moderate cost and the merchants of Boston are anxious to secure so great a protection to commerce. They can be used effectively upon the Southern coast. I trust that you will transmit an order to Governor Andrew by the bearer of this, Mr. Augustus H. Bixby.

I am, your obedient servant, GEORGE S. BOUTWELL.

[* This revolver gave me and my friend, Ebenezer F. Stone, then Adjutant-General of the State, more anxiety than all things else connected with the expedition. It never occurred to me to return the pistol. I discharged the barrels and laid the weapon away, only too glad to have it out of sight. Some years after the war, the Adjutant- General's department was investigated, and a shortage of arms was discovered. I received a letter asking me if I had a pistol belonging to the State. I returned the weapon which I neither wanted nor needed, and to that extent I relieved General Stone.]

XXVI THE MILITARY COMMISSION OF 1862 AND GENERAL FREMONT

In the month of May, or early in June 1862, I received a message from Mr. Stanton asking me to report in Washington, prepared to serve upon a commission at Cairo, Illinois. Upon arriving at Washington, I was informed that it would be the duty of the commission to examine claims that might be preferred against the Government, from the States of Missouri, Kentucky, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio. These claims had arisen from the operations of General Fremont and they were of great variety. At the end the commission were of the opinion that he was an expensive commander. Charles A. Dana was chairman of the commission, and Judge Logan, of Springfield, Illinois, an old friend of President Lincoln, was my associate. The health of Judge Logan soon failed, and he was succeeded by Mr. Cullom, afterwards Governor of Illinois, and a member of the United States Senate.

Our life at Cairo was disagreeable to an extent that cannot be realized easily. In the months of June and July the weather was extremely hot. The army of General Grant had quartered in and around the town during the preceding winter. The larger portion of the town inside of the levee, had been covered with water to the depth of several feet. Much of the refuse of the army, including some dead animals, had been left upon the surface of the ground. Sickness was general among the inhabitants. Health was the exception. We had our quarters upon the levee, and before a long time had passed we organized a mess with General Strong, the officer in command at that point. For myself I drank only tea and water from Iowa ice. With this drink and a moderate diet, I preserved my health. It was our fate each evening to witness and endure a collision of the thunder showers, one coming down the Mississippi, and the other down the Ohio.

Late in the afternoon we had the benefit of a trip upon a Government boat up the Ohio as far as Mound City. Once of a Sunday we made a trip to Columbus, Kentucky, then in command of General Quimby, of New York. We there met General Dodge, afterward a member of Congress from Iowa and subsequently a successful railway operator.

At Columbus we had a collation on the boat, where speeches were made by officers and civilians, in support of the war and for emancipation. On our return to Cairo, we were met by the customary evening shower, an unwelcome attendant upon a steamboat excursion.

My acquaintance with Mr. Dana gave me a high opinion of his business habits and faculties, and when General Grant became President and I was in charge of the Treasury, I urged the President to appoint Mr. Dana collector of the port of New York. The President had already selected Mr. Grinnell, but whether he had communicated the fact to Mr. Grinnell I never knew. Moreover, the President had formed an unfavorable opinion of Mr. Dana, arising from some intercourse during the war. Consequently, my advice was unavailing. The President said, however, that I might offer him the post of chief appraiser of the port of New York. The offer was declined; and from that time forward Mr. Dana was the President's bitter enemy. As another result, there was no further communication between Mr. Dana and myself. Once I saw him upon a steamer, but we did not recognize each other. In the year 1887, in consequence of a paragraph in the New York Sun in which my name was mentioned, not unkindly, I wrote a brief note to Mr. Dana. Without delay I received from him a long and almost affectionate letter, in which he urged me to let him know when I was in New York, that he might call upon me, and talk over some things old, and some things new.

I called upon him in New York at his office, where we had a pleasant chat of an hour. His office was plain, without carpets, the floor was worn rough, rather than smooth, and the appearance of the rooms was a striking contrast to the editorial rooms of prosperous journalists generally.

My experience at Cairo gave me a poor opinion of Fremont's qualities as a business man, but in the early part of his career he had exhibited capacity of a high order as a bold and successful explorer of the then unknown regions of the Rocky Mountains. He had also exhibited genius as a soldier, which led to high expectations which were not realized when he came to important commands in the Civil War. My studied opinion of General Fremont is contained in an article that I prepared for the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, of which society he was an honorary member:

ARTICLE ON GENERAL FREMONT

It is a singular circumstance in the career of John C. Fremont that his important services as an explorer and his contributions to science were brought to a close when he was scarcely more than thirty-four years of age. He was born in the State of Georgia in the year 1813, and from the year 1842 to the year 1846 inclusive, he undertook and carried to a successful result three expeditions from the Mississippi River across the plains, and finally over both chains of the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific Ocean. Mr. Jefferson, during his administration had realized the importance of securing "open over-land commercial relations with Asia," as stated in one of his messages to Congress, and, as a preparation for establishing such relations with Asia, he originated and organized the expedition of Lewis and Clark, whose duty it was to trace the affluents of the Columbia River now known as Snake River and Clarke's Fork.

Fremont's early education was obtained under the charge largely of Dr. John Roberton, a Scotchman, who had been educated at Edinburgh, and who had established himself at Charleston, S. C., as a teacher of the ancient languages. Dr. Roberton says that in the space of a year Fremont read four books of Caesar, six books of Vergil, nearly all of Horace, and two books of Livy; and in Greek, all the Graeca Minora, about half of the Graeca Majora, and four books of Homer's Iliad. At the end of a year he entered the Junior Class of Charleston College, where he gained high standing for study and in scholarship; but for insubordination he was expelled from the college.

In 1833 he was appointed teacher of mathematics in the Navy, and made a cruise to South America, which occupied about two and a half years of time. While absent, a law was passed creating the office of professor of mathematics in the Navy, for which Fremont upon his return was examined, and appointed. Without entering upon the duties of the place, he declined the position, and accepted the post of surveyor and railroad engineer upon the railway line between Charleston and Augusta. In 1838 and 1839 he was associated with M. Nicollet, a Frenchman and a member of the Academy of Science, in an exploring expedition over the Northwestern prairie and along the valley of the Mississippi. During his absence, he was appointed by President Van Buren a second lieutenant in the corps of topographical engineers. Upon his return from the Upper Mississippi, and for the period of a year, he was engaged with Nicollet and Mr. Hassler, then the head of the Coast Survey, in the arrangement of the scientific materials that had been collected during the expedition, and in the preparation of a map and a report. In 1842 he was directed by Colonel Abert, the chief of the topographical corps, to make an exploration of the Northwestern frontier of the State of Missouri to the Rocky Mountains, and with special reference to an examination of what was known as South Pass in those mountains. This expedition was on a small scale, consisting of twenty-one men only, most of whom were of French extraction. In this expedition he traced the waters of the Platte to the South Pass, which he reached the 8th of August. It was stated by Dr. Linn, then a Senator from the State of Missouri, that "over the whole course of the road barometrical observations were made by Mr. Fremont to ascertain the elevations both of the plains and of the mountains, astronomical observations were made to ascertain latitudes and longitudes, the face of the country was marked as arable or sterile, the facility of traveling and the practicability of routes noted, the grand features of nature described and some represented in drawings, military positions indicated, and a large contribution to geology and botany was made in varieties of plants, flowers, shrubs, trees and grasses, and rocks and earths, which were enumerated." The second expedition of May, 1843, was upon a larger scale, and it was not completed until the month of July, 1844. He was directed to extend his survey across the continent, on the line of travel between the State of Missouri and the tide-water region of the Columbia.

In its execution, much more ground was covered than had been contemplated in the order. Fremont was the first person that visited the basin of the Great Salt Lake who was able to furnish a scientific and accurate description of the region. Von Humboldt, in his work entitled "Aspects of Nature" (pp. 32-34) has given a summary of the results reached by Fremont in his first and second expeditions, as follows:

"Fremont's map and geographical researches embrace the immense tract of land extending from the confluence of the Kansas River with the Missouri to the cataracts of the Columbia, and the missions of Santa Barbara and the Pueblo de los Angeles in New California, presenting a space amounting to 28 degrees of longitude (about 1,300 miles) between the 34th and 35th parallels of north latitude. Four hundred points have been hypsometrically determined by barometrical measurements, and for the most part astronomically; so that it has been rendered possible to delineate the profile above the sea's level of a tract of land measuring 3,600 miles, with all its inflections, extending from the north of Kansas to Fort Vancouver and to the coasts of the South Sea (almost 720 miles more than the distance from Madrid to Tobolsk). As I believe I was the first who attempted to represent, in geognostic profile, the configuration of Mexico, and the Cordilleras of South America,—for the half-perspective projections of the Siberian traveler, the Abbe Chappe* were based upon mere, and for the most part on very inaccurate, estimates of the falls of rivers,—it has afforded me special satisfaction to there find the graphical method of representing the earth's configuration in a vertical direction, that is, the elevation of a solid over fluid parts, achieved on so vast a scale. In the mean latitude of 37 degrees to 43 degrees, the Rocky Mountains present, besides the great snow-crowned summits, whose height may be compared to that of the Peak of Teneriffe, elevated plateaux of an extent scarcely to be met with in any other part of the world, and whose breadth from east to west is almost twice that of the Mexican highlands. From the range of mountains which being a little westward of Fort Laramie, to the farther side of the Wasatch Mountains, the elevation of the soil is uninterruptedly maintained from 5,000 to upwards of 7,000 feet above the sea level; nay, this elevated portion occupies the whole space between the true Rocky Mountains and the Californian snowy coast range from 34 degrees to 45 degrees north latitude. This district, which is a kind of broad longitudinal valley, like that of Lake Titicaca, has been named the Great Basin by Joseph Walker and Captain Fremont, travelers well acquainted with those western regions. It is a terra incognita of at least 128,000 English square miles, almost uninhabited, and full of salt lakes, the largest of which is 3,940 Parisian (or 4,200 English) feet above the level of the sea, and is connected with the narrow Lake Utah,** into which the 'Rock River' (Timpan Ogo in the Utah language) pours its copious stream."

Fremont's third expedition was commenced August 16, 1845, under instructions to explore the interior of the region known as the Great Basin, and the maritime ports of Oregon and California. The first important incident of that expedition was the message of General Castro, ordering Fremont to leave the Territory. This was in the month of March, 1846. At the moment, Fremont refused to obey the order, and proceeded to fortify his camp, where he raised the United State flag, and remained for about three days. On further consideration, however, he left his camp and proceeded north towards Oregon. In the early part of the month of May he was overtaken by a messenger named Neal, who informed him that Lieutenant Gillespie, an agent of the Government at Washington, was on his way, charged with the delivery of letters, and with verbal instructions from the authorities. Upon receipt of this information, Fremont changed his course, and on the second day met Gillespie, who brought only a letter of introduction from the Secretary of State, Mr. Buchanan, with letters and papers from Senator Benton. From Gillespie he learned that it was the purpose of the authorities to ascertain the disposition of the inhabitants of California, to conciliate their feelings in favor of the United States, and to counteract as far as possible any designs of the British Government upon that Territory. Fremont made his way to the settled parts of California, near Monterey, where he found Commodore Sloat in command of a United States fleet. In co-operation with him and largely through Fremont's agency, the Mexican authorities were dispersed, the flag of the United States was raised at Monterey and other points, and all was accomplished before information was received of the existence of war between the United States and Mexico. These proceedings were justified by the Government of the United States. In the month of December following, Brigadier-General S. W. Kearny arrived in the Territory, and ultimately there was a conflict between him and Commodore Stockton, who had succeeded Commodore Sloat, as to the command of the forces in California. Until the arrival of Kearny, Fremont had been acting under the orders of Commodore Stockton, had raised troops, and had received from him the appointment of Governor of the Territory. General Kearny, in asserting his authority as commander-in-chief, ordered Fremont to raise troops and submit himself to his orders. This Fremont declined to do, giving as his reason that he had acted under Commodore Stockton, that it was their duty to adjust their differences, and that until they had done so, he should act under the orders of Commodore Stockton. This course on his part led to his arrest while on his way to Washington, and his trial by a court martial upon three charges: "1st, mutiny; 2nd, disobedience of orders; and 3d, conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline." On these charges he was convicted, and sentenced by the court martial to be dismissed from the service. Six of the officers who were of the court recommended him to the clemency of the President. The President disapproved of the findings of the court as to the charge of mutiny, but expressed the opinion that the second and third charges were sustained by the proofs; but that, in consideration of the valuable services of Lieutenant Colonel Fremont, the penalty of dismissal from the service was remitted. When the findings of the court were announced, and the action of the President was made known to Fremont, he wrote a letter to the Adjutant-General resigning his commission as Lieutenant-Colonel of the Army, and giving as a reason that he could not, by accepting the clemency of the President, admit the justice of the sentence.

It is not easy, from a legal point of view, to justify the action of the President. If the conduct of Fremont in refusing to recognize the authority of General Kearny was an offence, it must have rested upon the fact that Kearny exhibited to him evidence which should have satisfied a reasonable person that he had authority from the President to take command of the military forces in California; and if such authority was exhibited to Fremont and he refused obedience, his refusal constituted the crime of mutiny. The other offences charged against Fremont would have followed as a matter of course; but in the absence of proof that he was guilty of mutiny, there was no evidence whatever on which the minor charges could be sustained. Thus ended Fremont's military services and his career as an explorer when he was less than thirty-four years of age.

Fremont's subsequent career may be considered under three heads. First, in business affairs, in which, apparently, he was unsuccessful. Next, he was the first candidate of the Republican Party for the office of President of the United States. His acceptance of the nomination, and his letters and statements touching the policy and purposes of the new organization were not merely formal, but they were pronounced declarations in favor of the movement, with clear expressions in harmony with the object of the party, which was the prevention of the extension of slavery in the Territories. Although a Southern man by birth his devotion to the freedom of the Territories was as ardent as that of Lincoln, or any of the other leaders of the time. Finally, in the Civil War, he made a tender of his services to the Government, and as Major-General, and in command of the forces in the Department of Missouri, he issued a proclamation of emancipation of the slaves within his jurisdiction. This proclamation was countermanded by the President, and for the sufficient reason that he reserved to himself the absolute control of the question of the abolition of slavery in the seceding States and within the lines of our armies. It cannot be said that Fremont's military career was marked by any signal successes, but there can be no doubt of his ardent devotion to the cause of his country.

[* Chappe d'Auteroche, "Voyage en Sibirie," fait en 1761, 4 vols., 4th ed., Paris, 1768.

** Fremont "Report of the Exploring Expedition," pp. 154 and 273-276.]

XXVII ORGANIZATION OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE SYSTEM IN THE UNITED STATES

Before the work at Cairo was finished I received a message from Mr. Chase, Secretary of the Treasury, asking me to come to Washington and take charge of the Internal Revenue Office, or rather, to organize it under a statute then recently passed, but which I had not seen. After a conversation with Mr. Dana, who advised me to accept the place, I returned to Washington, where I arrived July 16, 1862. After an interview with Mr. Chase I took the oath of office before Mr. Justice Wayne of the Supreme Court. He was then aged and that fact may have deterred him from following the example of his younger associate, Justice Campbell, who resigned his office, and joined in the work of secession. Judge Wayne was disposed to conversation, but he made no allusion to the war and the issues involved.

I was assigned to a small room on the first floor of the Treasury building, on the right of the lower door fronting on Pennsylvania Avenue. First, I read the statute and formed for myself an idea of the process by which the machine was to be set in motion. The statute was a remarkable exhibition of legislative wisdom under the circumstances, but it was incomplete in parts rather than imperfect in plan. In the course of two or three days Mr. Chase assigned to me three clerks from other offices in the Treasury, and all of them were very competent assistants—Mr. Estes, Mr. George Parnell, and Mr. A. B. Johnson. The order of assignment I do not recall. Mr. Estes went to New York in a few months, where he engaged in business. Mr. Parnell remained in the department many years and until his death. Mr. Johnson was subsequently transferred to the Lighthouse Board, of which he is the chief clerk.

We first considered what blanks would be needed to enable assessors and collectors to perform their duties and make proper records and returns. Then we devised the books for the local offices, and for the offices in Washington. There was but one error as tested by experience in the preparations of the blanks and books, and the forms were followed in the department, except so far as changes in the law required alteration. Thus far there has never been a fraud or defalcation that was attributable to inadequate checks in the system. While I was at the head of the office, Mr. Chase never required me to retain a clerk who was incompetent or untrustworthy. There were times, however, when he looked to appointments with reference to Presidential preferences, and he always considered himself in the line of succession.

Mr. Chase's mental processes were slow, but time being given, he had the capacity to form sound opinions. Not infrequently, when I called at his office for conference, he would say: "My mind is preoccupied— you must either decide for yourself, or call again." As a result, he never gave an opinion or tendered any advice in relation to the business of the Internal Revenue Office while I was at the head of it. Mr. Chase had only a limited knowledge of the business of the department. Indeed, only a very extraordinary man could have administered the business of the department systematically, with a daily or frequent knowledge of the doings of the many heads of bureaus and divisions, and at the same time have matured and put into operation, the financial measures which were required by the exigencies of the war.

Mr. Chase's three great measures were the Abolition of State Banks and the substitution of the National Banking System, the issue of the United States legal tender notes, and the issue of the Five-Twenty Bonds. In combination, as a financial system, they enabled the country to carry a debt of three thousand million dollars, and it is probable that a debt of six thousand million would not have paralyzed the public credit. It is an instance of the frailty of human nature, when men are in the presence of great temptations, that when he became Chief Justice of the United States, he announced the opinion that the issue of United States legal tender notes was unconstitutional. That measure was the key to his financial system, and a measure indispensable to the prosecution of the war. It was a forced loan, but in an exigency a government has as good a right to force capital into the public service as to force men. If in 1862 Mr. Chase had acted upon the doctrine set forth in his judicial opinion in the Hepburn and Griswold case, the probability is that the government of Mr. Lincoln would have been reduced financially to an equality with the government of the Confederate States. The ultimate reversal of that opinion is the most important act of the Supreme Court. It gives to the political department of the Government, the power to convert all the resources of the country into the means of defence in time of war, foreign or domestic.

While I held the office of commissioner of internal revenue, I had occasion to consult Mr. Bates, the Attorney-General. He was a kind hearted gentleman, but lacking in vigor and official independence.

There was no provision in the statute for a cashier. The law contemplated that the money would be paid to the commissioner. As it was impossible for me to perform that duty personally, I asked Mr. Chase for authority to appoint Mr. Marshall Conant, who had been and perhaps then was principal of the Normal School, at Bridgewater, Mass., a clerk in the office, and assign him to duty as cashier. He was appointed to a twelve hundred dollar clerkship, from which he was advanced to fourteen and then to sixteen hundred dollars. From September 1, 1862, to March 3, 1863, he collected and accounted for about thirty-seven million dollars, without any other security than his own good name, and all for a compensation of about eight hundred dollars. I urged Congress to make some adequate compensation, but the request was neglected. When I was in the Senate, I renewed the effort in behalf of his widow, but the attempt was a failure.

The organization of the office was effected by systematic processes. From manufacturers, from assessors and collectors, and from other interested parties numerous inquiries came to the office. The letters containing these inquiries were thrown into a basket, and reserved for the evening sessions, at which the heads of divisions—as divisions were created—were required to attend. These letters were read at the conferences, and when a conclusion was reached, the letter containing the inquiry was put aside for answer. The other letters were held for further consideration. All unanswered letters were read and considered every evening. Letters often remained unanswered for days, and perhaps for weeks, but at length the answer would be reached. By this process the decisions were rendered harmonious. I had the aid of two short- hand writers, and between 8:30 and 10 A. M., I was able usually to dictate the answers and in sufficient quantity to occupy the short-hand writers till 3 o'clock P. M., when the answers were submitted to me. These I read, corrected and signed. They were then referred to the respective divisions for future guidance. Thereafter all inquiries which had been so answered, were treated as routine business, and the letters in reply were signed without inquiry by clerks or by myself. Thus it happened that we were not often compelled to reverse our rulings, and generally they were sustained by the courts.

Mr. S. M. Clark, then superintendent of the Bureau of Printing, was greatly disappointed when I decided to reject all his designs for stamps, and required him to introduce the likeness of Washington after Stuart into each stamp. As far as I know, the internal revenue stamps were never approved or criticized by the critics nor by the public. After advertisement a contract was made with Messrs. Butler and Carpenter, of Philadelphia, to furnish the stamps of all sizes, and to meet the expense of the engraving, at the rate of thirteen cents per thousand. In the year 1873 I received from Mr. Carpenter an album which contained proof specimens of every internal revenue adhesive stamp, public and private, engraved and printed, previous to March, 1873. This volume may contain the only complete collection of stamps issued from the Internal Revenue Office previous to that year.

When we were about to make appointments of assessors, and of collectors of internal revenue, Mr. Thurlow Weed called at the office, and said that if I would allow him to see the New York papers he would give me his opinion of the qualifications of the candidates, and any facts within his knowledge. This he did, and with entire fairness, as I now believe. He distinguished between the Seward men and the opponents of Seward, treating their merits and weaknesses without prejudice or feeling. Again, when the collectors' bonds had been filed, he examined them, and under his advice, the principals, in several cases, were required to add to the strength of the security. Mr. Chase took no part in the appointment of collectors and assessors, beyond the designation of two collectors, one in Ohio, and one in Massachusetts, with whom he was acquainted. Mr. Lincoln also designated two, one in Illinois and one in California, and for the same reason. Of these, three proved unworthy. They may have assumed upon the way of their appointment, as security against discipline or removal. The rest were appointed upon written recommendations, and for the most part the duties were well performed to the end of their terms, and some of them held their places for more than twenty years. The appointments were made in August and September when visits to Washington were not agreeable. In a number of recommendations for a candidate, if he is not entirely worthy, some of the letters of commendation will indicate weakness. The whole ground will not be covered, or there will be qualifications. A candidate so weakened should always be passed by. Letters are the safest basis of action in appointments to office. Personal appeals are made most usually by interested parties.

At the time of the disasters to Pope and McClellan, Mr. Chase was demoralized completely. He said to me:

"We have only to wait for the end."

He took me to the President, and said that he could take no part in the appointments. In that period Mr. Chase was very bitter in his criticisms of the President. He thought him very slow in regard to emancipation. Of this opinion there was a formidable knot around Washington, Mr. Chase and Mr. Sumner being at their head. Indeed, their opinion in that particular was shared by many, myself among them, but I never lost confidence in the purposes of Mr. Lincoln, and I well knew that the way of safety was to maintain the closest relations with him. No one who knew him had any ground to doubt his good intentions. The truth was, that Mr. Chase was a candidate for the Presidency whenever he had the courage to believe in the preservation of the Government.

From July to the end of December, 1862, I went to the office before breakfast, then during the day, and then again in the evening. My only exercise was a ride on horseback after office hours and before dinner. When Pope's army was driven within the entrenchments of Washington, General Banks was made military commander of the district. I was then living in a house at the corner of G and Twenty-first Streets, which my friend Mr. Hooper tendered me during the recess of Congress upon the condition that I would retain, pay and maintain his servants. Among them was his cook, Monaky, who had been cook for Mr. Webster. When Fletcher Webster was killed, she was in great grief. I invited General Banks to make his quarters with me, and I had thus some means of knowing the condition of affairs in the army and around the district.

While he was with me, we called upon General Hooker at the asylum, the Insane Hospital, on the east side of the east branch of the Potomac River, to which place he had been sent to be treated for a wound in his leg, which he had received at the Battle of Antietam. He was violent in his denunciation of McClellan for not using his entire force, and for not following the enemy—claiming that the whole body might have been destroyed. Barring his violence of language, and the impropriety of criticising his commander, there can be no doubt of the justice of what he said. McClellan retained upon the left bank of the Antietam, a body of men whose participation in the battle at the opportune moment would have changed a qualified victory into a rout of the enemy. Lee was saved at Antietam and at Gettysburg by the incompetency of McClellan and Meade.

The movements by Lee in crossing the Potomac in 1862 and again in 1863 were most unfortunate for the Confederacy, and with Grant, or Sherman, or Sheridan, or Logan in command of our forces, must have resulted disastrously. It was the necessity of the situation that we were compelled to go to Lee, wherever he might choose to place himself. When he assumed the offensive, and abandoned his base, he exchanged positions, and greatly to his disadvantage. That he escaped destruction was due to his good fortune and to our incompetency and not to his own merit as commander.

The Sunday morning after Pope's defeat, David Dudley Field called at my office at the Treasury, and after some conversation upon the condition of affairs, he said he wished to see the President. I aided him in securing an interview. What was the object of this interview with the President I cannot say, but his conversation led my mind to the conclusion that he thought himself qualified for the command of the army.

The events of that day made a lasting impression upon my mind. The city was filled with troops, the hospitals, churches and other buildings were crowded with the wounded; the streets were stuffed with ambulances, baggage wagons, artillery, and material of war. The hills were dotted with tents, and the officers and men were discontented and almost in a state of mutiny. The demand for the restoration of McClellan was almost universal. There can be no doubt that he was then adored by the troops. In six months that feeling had given place to a feeling of indifference or positive distrust as to his capacity of integrity of purpose.

During the preceding week, I had made many attempts to secure an interview with the President in regard to the appointment of collectors and assessors, as they were to commence their duties under the law September 1. Finally he gave me Sunday at 11 o'clock. He canvassed the papers and considered the merits of the candidates with as much coolness and care apparently, as he would have exhibited in a condition of profound peace. When the business was ended, he asked me what I thought about the command of the army. I said unhesitatingly that the restoration of McClellan seemed the only safe policy. I had seen and heard so much, that I was apprehensive of serious trouble in the army if he should again be superseded. I then said that emancipation seemed the only way out of our troubles. He said in reply: